It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Peter Madoff's Assets Frozen as Part of Investor Suit

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Peter Madoff's Assets Frozen as Part of Investor Suit


www.bloomberg.com

March 25 (Bloomberg) -- Peter Madoff, brother of convicted Ponzi scheme mastermind Bernard Madoff, had his assets frozen by a New York state judge as part of a lawsuit filed by an investor who lost $470,000 in his brother’s fraud.

New York Supreme Court Justice Stephen Bucaria in Nassau County on Long Island today signed an order temporarily freezing the assets of Peter Madoff, who was chief compliance officer of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, according to Howard Samuels, a lawyer who is the father of the plaintiff in the case. Bucaria will hold a hearing on April 3.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.reuters.com
online.wsj.com




posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   
It will be interesting to see what is disclosed in this case. It is beyond belief that Madoff's family was unaware of the decades long scheme to steal investors money.

Hopefully some of the details rooted out by this students attorney can get the snowball rolling and bring ALL of those connected to the scam to justice.

www.bloomberg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
I'm surprised the assets weren't already frozen. I would think they'd be doing everything in their power to squeeze the whole 17th floor to see who cracks first.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Crakeur
 



Since we don't know the details of Bernie's plea deal, (at least I don't), I would think that individual lawsuits like this one would be the only way to OPEN the door to future prosecution.

I definitely think a deal was agreed to also to protect some of those in the SEC who ignored the RED FLAGS that were presented way back when...

Hopefully this whole ordeal will surface, I don't have the usual 40 years to wait for information on the governments complicity if you know what I mean.

If it takes that long I won't be worried about it, I will be looking for my next ice cream sandwich, drooling on my gown and probably watching Jeopardy.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


he didn't plea bargain. he took the guilty route on the charges, never admitting conspiracy, thus he is protecting the rest of his clan.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Crakeur
 


Exactly.

Only, it looks as if his family isn't going to be protected after all. It won't be long until they are all implicated and assets are frozen/siezed to pay back the investors.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Crakeur
 


Ahhh, thanks for the clarification, that prompted another thought, if it were ALL Madoff family members involved,

I have thought that a spouse could invoke some statue to prevent testifying against another in court, if this is true, does it extend to father/son, brother/brother etc etc...?

I certainly hope that more indictments are coming in regards to this situation, sacrificing only one of the crew only invites more of these con artists to try and accomplish the same in the future.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:09 PM
link   
spouses do have that protection.

the way I think it will work is this:
the accountant and the assistant will both wind up under heavy scrutiny. The accountant will implicate Peter and/or Shana Madoff.

Shana is a mother of young kids (or kid) and that threat of the rest of her life in prison should be ample catalyst to get shana to open up.

the assistant will implicate ruth, peter and shana.

they will all turn on eachother.

the assistant will also tip the feds off to Frank's involvement. Frank's involvement will lead to the big fish. Mafia.



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur

the way I think it will work is this:
the accountant and the assistant will both wind up under heavy scrutiny. The accountant will implicate Peter and/or Shana Madoff.

Shana is a mother of young kids (or kid) and that threat of the rest of her life in prison should be ample catalyst to get shana to open up.

the assistant will implicate ruth, peter and shana.

they will all turn on each other.

the assistant will also tip the feds off to Frank's involvement. Frank's involvement will lead to the big fish. Mafia.






I'll concur this is the way things have unravelled the past. Family ties and Omerta put to the ultimate test.

But this case has unique factors and there is a rethink happening on the legal front.

From discussions with friends with direct input to higher levels of the judicial system, priorities are changing. It once was just about going after the bad guys. Now more than ever its a matter of which bad guys to go after and which ones to leave alone. More to do with limited resources and probable outcomes than anything else.

I'd like to believe the real top players in organized crime will be brought to trial, but I'm not that confident. Too much compromising embroilment in politics, banking, big business, to get full exposure. Some lightweights will probably be taken out and they'll end it will wind down after that.

A big question I see little discussion of, is where are the massive proceeds of the drug industry being laundered these days.

There is grapevine talk but nothing substantiated.

Anybody care to share rumours or make an educated guess?


Mike



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


This is an example of why the U.S. Congress or any government agency is useless in representing the People of The United States, or any victim of a giant ponzi scheme...


2:30 p.m. | Again, no answer: Representative Joe Donnelly of Indiana asks how long the S.E.C. knew there was a one-person accounting firm involved in Mr. Madoff’s operation. Ms. Thomsen said she couldn’t answer that question.


dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


truth is, the auditing firm should have been an indicator to anyone who was looking into the firm but you can't expect anyone to know how long they knew. it's sort of pointless.

I think a lot of what we're seeing is political ladder clmbing now. the lawsuit against Merkin is another example of this. how can they file a suit against him with such little evidence? Cuomo is using his position to try and bully businessmen into giving him what he wants. He did it with the AIG execs, threatening to make their names and bonuses public and now this. He's got good intentions but he's not helping really.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join